Honey, since when is not being open about your beliefs seen as hiding in the closet.

It is, if "not being open" is the same as no one knowing. You can not keep people from knowing unless you keep it to yourself and don't share your opinions with friends and family. When it is out in the open then you have to deal with it some way or another.

Originally Posted By: Diavolo

You are battling for societal acceptance

No I am not. But I see no point in not addressing and changing misconceptions if I can. In my experience people are able to find something in Satanism to disagree with and hate, even if they realize that most satanists do not have a diet of infants and blood. But most of what they disagree with is not against any Danish laws, and we can not be prosecuted because of it. I do not try to sell Satanism as pink and fluffy, but most misconceptions about Satanism in Denmark connect it to teenage vandalism of churchyards and goth culture, so it is viewed more as immature then dangerous.

Originally Posted By: Diavolo

You act as if wearing a baphomet makes anyone satanic. You can blend in and still be completely different.

You missed my point. The point being that most of the satanists I know want to be able to say and do what every they want to, and most of them do that - without being prosecuted or burned at the stake. If you have to blend in all the time, you will have no rum to be an individual. I do not want to have to talk, act, believe, dress and look like everyone else to blend in. I will do as I have to do to fit in, have a good job etc. but I do not want to blend or act something I am not.

When one theory tries to explain everything from small pox to the music of Mozart on should be very suspicious.

I guess the same could be said about sociology.

Sociology is not a theory but a scientific field with a lot of different theories at work. Sociology can not explain everything, but at least it have more then one tool in its toolbox. Even biology has other tools besides Darwinian evolution.

Again, where does the assumption come from that when you have a certain opinion, people will run through their checklist and find out you are satanic. I can have opinions about anything out there and people will consider it opinions. I never met anyone this far that said; oh you think this, ergo you must be a satanist. People only know you are satanic if they are either very familiar with the subject or are satanists themselves. As long as you don't share the label, most people are oblivious to it.

People will always disagree with Satanism or have misconceptions. None is obliged to change that because again, if you don't throw yourself into the public, none affects you. Down here I share my views but out there, I could care less if they say that satanists sacrifice kittens. Just for the fun I would even add; "and babies too so I heard". Your "embrace me even when I special" attitude is silly at best. You don't embrace what you don't see fit, so how laughable is your desire for others to do it then?

How do you of all people not blend in at all? Your devil is sterile girl.

As I said - read his books if you want to form an opinion on his work on Satanism or other subjects.

Originally Posted By: Diavolo

Why is adding Nazism out of order? I surely don't need to explain that to you who (and I think this is a correct assumption) is looking for a correlation between specific satanists and Nazism as a 'told you so' argument.

To tell you the truth, Lewis showed me an earlier version of the survey, asking for suggestions because I communicated with him on the old survey, and because I have contributed to research before. At the time I had been writing on an article on ONA and neonazism in peganism and Satanism, and I suggested adding the questions about ONA and neonazism. If I had not met ONA supports on this board claiming ONA to be the secret force behind the rice of racial conflicts in Europe (an idea I view as absurd), I would not have worked on the article or suggested the questions. So I guess you can thank some of the ONA supporters I talked to on my last visit to this board.

Showing a connecting between the ONA and right wing political views would NOT be something to write home about. Showing the opposite would.

Originally Posted By: Diavolo

If the experts were the problem in the satanic panic, why would they now suddenly be the saviors? Did they see the light somewhere?

Why don't you read up on the subject? Try the book "The Satanism scare" edited by Bromley.

Originally Posted By: Diavolo

So you read about ONA 10 or 15 years ago and still consider yourself a resource upon the subject?

So your long lost leader has returned from fundamentalistic Islam and revived the movement or what? All the times I have seen followers of ONA they have not been connected to any orgs, or the orgs have been short lived, run by teenagers and not produced any material worth noticing or reading. If this has changed, I am more then trilled to have had the question about ONA included in the survey.

People only know you are satanic if they are either very familiar with the subject or are satanists themselves.

And if friends who are into Satanism visit and talk about Satanism, you tell them to turn their voices down so the guy next door don't notice, or tell then to shot up, if non-satanists are present? And if some of your satanic friends tell others about your connection to Satanism, you kill everyone involved? I guess not.

Originally Posted By: Diavolo

I could care less if they say that satanists sacrifice kittens. Just for the fun I would even add; "and babies too so I heard".

Eh, I am educated to teach young people about religion and psychology, and I have written on LaVey as part of my education. I would not be doing my job if I deliberately misinformed people on Satanism or other religions, and even people who knew nothing about my connection to Satanism would expect me to have some sort of knowledge on the subject. But yes, you are in a rather different line of work I guess...

Originally Posted By: Diavolo

Your "embrace me even when I special" attitude is silly at best. You don't embrace what you don't see fit, so how laughable is your desire for others to do it then?

There is a big differences between "embracing" and "not prosecuting". I do not want to be prosecuted for the wrong reasons.

I do think that Nazism is a relevant issue-- not only because of the ONA, but also because of the rise in popularity of the Joy of Satan. Granted, they're a moronic bunch, and I doubt any of their 13-year-old "followers" will still be on the LHP five years from now, but they still play a major part in Satanism's "net-image".

While I do believe that this survey will help de-mystify Satanic demographics a little bit, I don't see it having any overreaching effects or contribute to the "acceptance" of Satanism as a whole. I mean, you can have all the surveys you want, and the tabloids will still be pressing absurd articles like "Devil worshiping teen stabbed victim 666 times!", and that conservative Christian man walking down the street will still give you a funny look when he sees your Baphomet pendant (which you won't be able to get away with wearing to a job interview anytime soon).

Granted, it's technically possible, in some crazy pipe-dream world. But certainly not now, because we are not large enough-- proving point: the internet is still pretty much the main nexion of the "Satanic Community".

So, someone on this board told you ONA is the force behind the rise of racial conflicts in Europe and that convinced you to add the question to the survey and write an article about it. How gullible are you girl?

So you're writing an article about ONA, something you read upon about 10 years ago and clearly don't get at all. Just quit acting as if you're an academic whatever; you're a cackling housewife and Denmark must have some Nancy satanists that they allow you to represent them in the media. Or they consider you as their dark Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf. I see the joke so maybe they do too.

hahaa tell it like it is brother!Ive never once understood the need among many internet satanists to codify themselves, gain acceptance, official recognition, and academic notice.what do they want next? a reality tv show?

The survey was just something to kill time with. Now this thread seems like it's turned into a dick swinging contest on who's more Satanic than who.

Personally, I don't see the point in saying how Satanic one is or how many Satanic friends ya have or whatever. Just seems like pointless bickering that gets people nowhere, as the argument keeps going in full circle, and eventually we get to the point where someone gets banned or whatever because of something that spiraled out of control.

"Anyway, I don't believe in magic, occultism, gods or social darwinism as legitimate science - so I can hardly claim to *understand* anything involving those beliefs."

That's really funny since understanding social trends/cultures within groups, those issues do play a part in sociology.

No, understanding why people BELIEVE in them play a part. I don't study gods or magical powers - I study those who believe in them as do sociology.

Originally Posted By: Morgan

Honestly, a survey of 140 people is not going to change how people think. If anything, it would make the idea of satanism seem more trite.

No, 140 people is not a big sample. The point is, that 140 people is a bigger sample then what most have to relate to, and that a systematic survey shows more then a collection of personal experiences or anecdotal evidence. Yes, you have personal info on a lot of people, but unless you ask all new friends to fill in a form before you accept them as friends, you do not have any kind of systematic data. And even if you did, you would not publish your knowledge in peer reviewed books or magazines. Another problem is that your friends probably do not reflect Satanism as a whole, unless you actively try to become friends with every newbee on the net. And then we have the part about analyzing the data. To do that, you need more then the ability to find an average. You also have to be able to analyze the data in other ways, including relating the data to other surveys and facts. If surveys only had to do with finding an average, surveys would be part of mathematics, not something one had to use time to study in sociology and other fields.

Originally Posted By: Morgan

The world is not going to embrace Satanism, and I don't really want it to. There are enough people who see it as a fad or trendy thing to do.

This is another subject. Creating a realistic picture of Satanism is not the same as selling it to the masses. People do not want to join Satanism just because they realize that only few satanists eat babies and rape goats. We are not alone in this. Have you ever wondered why most satanists are white males? Satanism only attract some, and with all the "good publicity" it already have, the publicity should have to change quite a lot.Every time Satanism get bad press we get insane people who turn to Satanism in the hope to find like minded people. Even The600Club turn those away. I am unable to see how more realistic press would be a bigger problem to deal with.

Originally Posted By: Morgan

You may be something in Denmark, but this is the rest of the world, and you don't really matter.

And so what? Who said I did? Could we try aiming at the ball and disregard the dickfight? The validity of my opinions or arguments do not depend on who I am, who I know, how many friends I have or what names you call me.

Originally Posted By: Morgan

You don't have to scream to the world, I'm a Satanist. Just Live like one.

Don't worry - I can do that without you advice, as I am sure you can without mine.

Originally Posted By: Morgan

Surveys don't matter, it just kills time.

I guess sites like facebook has devalued peoples opinion of surveys. This does not change the fact that surveys are used and viewed as useful in a lot of fields, including sociology.

I find it rather scary to see how peoples experiences during "magical workings" or anecdotal evidence is accepted at face value by some in this forum, while tools from the academic toolbox and peer reviewed studies are treated like snakeoil and pipedreams. Nothing is perfect, but one could at least expect an equal evaluation.

"Your estimated numbers are quite probable, but alas: there's a little more to surveys than figuring out what the averages are."

True, you find out the averages plus the low to high ranges.

Low to high ranges, or rather the so-called "spread" or "variance," which are more meaningful in statistics than low-to-high ranges, are virtually inseparable from averages, so it goes without saying they're involved if averages are. However, I was thinking more along the lines of the important aspects of surveys. I'm sure you can come up with examples of somewhat more important other aspects than calculating averages (and their cousins: spread and variance)--if you know what you're talking about in terms of survey analysis, that is. Oh, wait, I forgot you said:

Quote:

That's it.

Well, Morgan, it is very, very far from it. Data analysis is a complicated task, and people don't spend years at university specializing in that field only to learn how to calculate averages.

Quote:

Just as it is my right to think you and your husband are dweebs with messiah complexes.

Speaking of messiah complexes and religious assumptions, I have to wonder why it is you think we're married just because we live together and have children together.

_________________________A comfortable falsehood will always win out over an uncomfortable truth. (Myself)

I find it rather scary to see how peoples experiences during "magical workings" or anecdotal evidence is accepted at face value by some in this forum, while tools from the academic toolbox and peer reviewed studies are treated like snakeoil and pipedreams.

Care to give an example where anything, especially "magical workings", were accepted at face value on this site? How about where "tools from the academic tool box" are treated like "snake oil and pipedreams"? Keep in mind that surveys, no matter how academic you champion them to be, do not fall into that category.

Or, here is an even better idea; can a mod or admin lock this thread? It is going nowhere and has strayed far off topic. What was the topic again?

So, someone on this board told you ONA is the force behind the rise of racial conflicts in Europe and that convinced you to add the question to the survey and write an article about it. How gullible are you girl?

This is not the point. The point is, that I was surprised to see anyone above the age of 15 taking the organization serious. 15 years ago when I joined the CoS noone took them serious, the organization was dead, and because of the satanic panic organizations like the ToS and the CoS had a hostile reaction to any mentioning of the groups. When I used ONA as an example in my original text, I used it because I was sure the org. was long dead and in bad standing in most satanic communities. Seeing that this has changed IS interesting.

Originally Posted By: Diavolo

So you're writing an article about ONA, something you read upon about 10 years ago and clearly don't get at all.

No, actually I was writing an article on nazism and Satanism (as stated). ONA was just a small part of it, so I will probably only use secondary literature from earlier writings on the subject. Analyzing all of primary literature will not be worth the effort in this context.

Originally Posted By: Diavolo

you're a cackling housewife and Denmark must have some Nancy satanists

And calling people names while hiding your face and real name is part of representing true hard core Satanism? I see. Could we please get back to playing with the ball? This is not a popularity contest.